| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 22:32:54 -0400 From: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com> To: Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org> Cc: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, axboe@...nel.dk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, neilb@...e.de, martin.petersen@...cle.com Subject: Re: [patch 1/2]block: handle merged discard request >>>>> "Shaohua" == Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org> writes: Shaohua> The SCSI discard implementation hacks the first bio of request Shaohua> to add payload, which makes blk_update_request() can't Shaohua> correctly mark bios finish. The patch solves it. We set Shaohua> discard bio size to 0 and finish it after the hacked payload Shaohua> finishes. Ick! Also, you can't muck with bi_size because if we get an I/O error and have to reissue the command we no longer know how much to write. I have had to deal with the same issue for WRITE SAME. And the only sane approach is to distinguish between the DMA transfer size and the blocks "affected" by the command. That's what I'm working on right now for copy offload... If this is something you want in 3.4 I guess we could temporarily add a separate length field to struct request. If you can wait I suggest we talk at LSF. -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists